Cockerill's chin wrote:Not throwaway comments Augie. There are usual suspects who appear to have opinions set in stone; whether these opinions are entrenched in the positive (Red/Louder) or negative (Sid/Yourself). These opinions that everything is fucking great/fucking shit are cemented in, untouchable by performances. Walcott played a significant part in getting us a crucial three points. We have dropped points in these types of games in the past, especially at this stage of the season. I posted on the official that Wenger cannot be responsible for the successful part of a season if he has no responsibility for the failures. That works both ways.
I think Walcott's crossing has improved this year. His link up with RVP is also encouraging. He is still young. A promising player. Before we dismiss him being worth 80-100k per week you need to look at the market. Denilson and B52 aren't worth their contracts which means we couldn't move them on. There would be no such problem with Theo. A host of clubs will offer him what he wants. That suggests, in todays market, he is worth the wage.
Fair enough CC but the "usual suspects" is a bit of a generalisation which I feel isnt a fair reflection of reality - over the past 12 months or so I defended kos on here when the knives were really out for him in the same way that I find myself defending mert and ramsey today (although in the past I was also a lone voice defending flaps and that didnt work out so well
) so while I may be a critic, I dont think that I am blinkered when assessing players.
The thing with walnut is regardless of whether you rate him or not you need to look at the bigger financial picture when assessing the situation - does it make sense financially to give feo the type of wages he is demanding when we already have a top heavy wage bill ? We already have the ox more than capable of filling his boots so wouldnt it be prudent to sell feo and re-invest that money in other area's ? We cant all bemoan the size of our wage bill and the excessive wages some players are on and at the same time refuse to address the issue by continuing to offer big wage increases to players unworthy of the sums concerned.
Your definition of being worth the wage is in my opinion majorly flawed - in one sentence you state that denilson and bentner are not worthy of their wages but in the same sentence you say that if clubs are willing to pay feo what he wants then that makes him worth the wage
By that argument doesnt that mean that denilson and bendtner are worth their wages cos we were stupid enough to pay them that amount ?